On 10/27/2011 5:35 PM, David Goehrig wrote:
probably:
sharp rise...
plateau...
collapse...
dark ages then begin.
As probably the only Late Ancient / Early Medievalist on this list, I feel a
need to correct this myth of the Dark Ages (which can be squarely blamed on
Edward Gibbon, and his
On 10/26/2011 6:06 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 09:00:36AM -0400, John Zabroski wrote:
Kurzweil addresses that.
As far as I know Kurzweil hasn't presented anything technical or even detailed.
Armwaving is cheap enough.
yep, one can follow a polynomial curve to pretty
is as passionate and willing to argue about the subject as Ray.
Cheers,
Z-Bo
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 2:44 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/14/2011 9:29 AM, karl ramberg wrote:
Interesting article :
http://www.itnews.com.au
On 10/14/2011 9:29 AM, karl ramberg wrote:
Interesting article :
http://www.itnews.com.au/News/276700,ibm-eyes-brain-like-computing.aspx
Not much details, but the what they envisions seems to be more of the
character a autonomic system that can be quarried for answers, not
programmed like
On 9/4/2011 11:38 PM, Michael Haupt wrote:
Hi Jecel,
Am 02.09.2011 um 20:51 schrieb Jecel Assumpcao Jr.:
Michael,
your solution is a little more indirect than dragging arrows in Self
since you have to create a global, which is what I would like to avoid.
ah, but instead of Smalltalk
, with those of immediate evaluation (and allowing more
convenient ways to deal with longer multi-line commands)/
F# REPL in Visual Studio also supports this. Pretty nice feature.
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 1:01 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9/4
On 8/23/2011 11:42 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
Sorry for being potentially rude. It's fairly ironic that I would talk about
this stuff given that I'm by no means authoritative for what is and isn't
appropriate here.
It's my understanding, however, that just anything isn't an appropriate topic
On 8/24/2011 1:00 AM, Julian Leviston wrote:
Hi,
On 24/08/2011, at 5:36 PM, BGB wrote:
ok, yeah, this is a little awkward, as my way of seeing things I
think tends to be a little more here and now, like the pink plane
in the video linked to with Alan talking about things (started trying
-source efforts have
thus been very fragmentary, still often have to recreate all their data
from the ground up, ...
but, granted, maybe none of this is really relevant here...
Regards,
Dave
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 1:17 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/24
On 8/20/2011 9:25 AM, John McKeon wrote:
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Julian Leviston jul...@leviston.net
mailto:jul...@leviston.net wrote:
On 21/08/2011, at 12:22 AM, John McKeon wrote:
On Saturday, August 20, 2011, Alan Kay alan.n...@yahoo.com
On 8/19/2011 4:11 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 11:05 AM, DeNigris Seans...@clipperadams.com wrote:
After reading many of the LISP suggestions (thanks), the primary features seem
to me to be:
I'm not sure where, if at all, security comes in
Security was, quite
On 8/19/2011 7:41 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 5:33 PM, BGBcr88...@gmail.com wrote:
'Messaging' is a problem child of its own. It forces us to write
highly stateful applications, in order to coordinate or orchestrate
multiple devices. Resulting applications are neither
On 8/17/2011 6:41 PM, Alan Kay wrote:
Take a look at Landin's papers and especially ISWIM (The next 700
programming languages)
You don't so much want to learn Lisp as to learn the idea of Lisp
now, I am wondering some what is exactly the idea of Lisp?
putting the phrase into Google doesn't
On 8/18/2011 8:03 AM, Monty Zukowski wrote:
The Little Lisper is one of my favorite computer books. I think it
teaches the idea of Lisp, though without expounding on it.
I mean, I am basically familiar with both Lisp and Scheme, but the way
the statement was written implied there was some
On 8/18/2011 11:08 AM, Chris Warburton wrote:
On Thursday 18 August 2011 18:15:03 Alan Kay wrote:
Another more trivial but telling point is that John did not like the use of
S expressions for programming -- he invented them to have a way to
represent collections and to serve as an internal form
I once had a good experience using Scheme, which has influenced most of
my later efforts (despite me generally switching to a more traditional
C-family-like syntax, invoking many accusations of blub and similar).
I also found Self an interesting language to look at.
Lisp-style syntax does
On 8/17/2011 2:15 PM, Tomasz Rola wrote:
May I join in :-) ?
This is my first post here, so hello everybody. In one sentence, I like
computing (that's introduction).
On Wed, 17 Aug 2011, BGB wrote:
I once had a good experience using Scheme, which has influenced most of my
later efforts
On 8/15/2011 3:06 AM, Chris Warburton wrote:
On Friday 12 August 2011 21:23:23 BGB wrote:
newer Linux distros also seem to do similar to Windows, by default
running everything under a default user account, but requiring
authorization to elevate the rights of applications (to root), although
On 8/12/2011 12:26 AM, David Barbour wrote:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:22 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
if the alteration would make the language unfamiliar to people;
It is true that some people would rather work around a familiar,
flawed language than
On 8/12/2011 9:23 AM, David Barbour wrote:
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 2:44 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
but, whether or not they use it, or care that it exists, is
irrelevant...
Then so is the language.
by this criteria, pretty much everything
On 8/12/2011 4:58 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 1:23 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
also, security-check models are well proven in systems like
Windows and Linux...
It is true that there are success stories using checked permissions
On 8/11/2011 10:08 AM, Monty Zukowski wrote:
A huge amount of work has been done in this area in the capability
security world. See for instance the reference to Mark Miller's
thesis in the footnotes of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-capability_model
A short summary of capability security
On 8/11/2011 12:55 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 7:35 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
not all code may be from trusted sources.
consider, say, code comes from the internet.
what is a good way of enforcing security in such a case
values.
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 19:06, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/11/2011 12:55 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 7:35 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
not all code may be from trusted sources
On 8/11/2011 8:16 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 5:06 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
the big problem though:
to try to implement this as a sole security model, and expecting
it to be effective, would likely impact language design
On 8/9/2011 5:37 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 3:40 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
ideally, we should probably be working with higher-level
entities instead of lower-level geometry.
I agree with rendering high-level concepts rather than
well, ok, this is currently mostly about my own language, but I figured
it might be relevant/interesting.
the basic idea is this:
not all code may be from trusted sources.
consider, say, code comes from the internet.
what is a good way of enforcing security in such a case?
first obvious
On 8/8/2011 6:55 PM, Casey Ransberger wrote:
On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 3:48 AM, Giulio Prisco giu...@gmail.com
mailto:giu...@gmail.com wrote:
SecondPlace, QwaqLife or TeleSim? Open ended, comments welcome.
http://giulioprisco.blogspot.com/2011/08/secondplace-qwaqlife-or-telesim.html
I
On 8/9/2011 1:44 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Steve Wart st...@wart.ca
mailto:st...@wart.ca wrote:
3D design is extraordinarily expensive to develop properly
That is not an essential property of 3D design. We could have an
ontology / 'markup language' just
On 8/6/2011 7:27 PM, Simon Forman wrote:
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 2:48 AM, Alan Kayalan.n...@yahoo.com wrote:
That was my thought when I first saw what Seymour Papert was doing with
children and LOGO in the 60s. I was thinking about going back into Molecular
Biology, but Seymour showed that
On 8/4/2011 6:19 PM, Alan Kay wrote:
Here's the link to the paper
http://www.vpri.org/pdf/rn2005001_learning.pdf
inference:
it is not that basic math and physics are fundamentally so difficult to
understand...
but that many classes portray them as such a confusing and incoherent
mess of
On 8/5/2011 6:13 AM, Ondřej Bílka wrote:
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 03:43:04AM -0700, BGB wrote:
On 8/4/2011 6:19 PM, Alan Kay wrote:
Here's the link to the paper
[1]http://www.vpri.org/pdf/rn2005001_learning.pdf
inference:
it is not that basic math and physics
On 8/5/2011 11:56 AM, Wesley Smith wrote:
vectors are nice though.
for example, in the book I had, some aspects of the topic were expressed in
terms of a mess of trigonometry which wouldn't really work correctly in 3D.
some of these topics were fairly simple/elegant-looking if expressed with
On 8/4/2011 1:06 AM, David Barbour wrote:
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 12:10 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
The new thread should inherit the entire dynamic scope -
logically, a local copy thereof. If there are object
references mixed
On 8/4/2011 7:55 AM, David Barbour wrote:
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 1:53 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
if the parent thread sees its thread-local variable change when a
child-thread assigns to it, this is a problem. it is a natural result
though
On 8/4/2011 1:35 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 12:43 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
it is a straightforward interpretation of scope:
both lexical and dynamic scope cross code boundaries with no
effects on their behavior.
this makes
On 8/3/2011 7:32 AM, Chris Warburton wrote:
On Tuesday 02 August 2011 00:43:57 BGB wrote:
On 8/1/2011 3:24 PM, Simon Forman wrote:
On 7/27/11, Chris Warburtonchriswa...@googlemail.com wrote:
snip
(maybe relevant but no really to comment).
Another reason I would argue against something
sorry, just trying to clarify a few points...
On 8/3/2011 9:57 AM, BGB wrote:
in my own language, there is the async modifier which can
(theoretically) be used for a lot of this:
async function foo(x, y) { ... }
where calls to foo implicitly create their own thread.
async bar(x, 3);
would
On 8/3/2011 1:04 PM, Igor Stasenko wrote:
On 3 August 2011 21:04, BGBcr88...@gmail.com wrote:
sorry, just trying to clarify a few points...
...
sadly, the async modifier was used in the first incarnation of BGBScript
(2004-2006), but was never fully reimplemented when the language was
On 8/1/2011 3:24 PM, Simon Forman wrote:
On 7/27/11, Chris Warburtonchriswa...@googlemail.com wrote:
snip
(maybe relevant but no really to comment).
Another reason I would argue against something like types based on
Physics is that Physics tries to work out the inconceivable ways that
the
On 7/29/2011 7:06 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 5:08 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
Linden Labs tried to do similar with Second Life, but it hasn't
really caught on very well in-general.
however, most prior attempts: VRML, Adobe
On 7/28/2011 8:19 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 2:16 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
striving for simplicity can also help, but even simplicity can
have costs:
sometimes, simplicity in one place may lead to much higher complexity
On 7/29/2011 1:05 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 3:12 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
snip...
nothing interesting to comment/add...
Snow Crash: dot pattern from space - brain-damage
Ah, yes, that wasn't the bit I wanted to create from
On 7/28/2011 9:57 AM, Alan Kay wrote:
Well, we don't absolutely *need* music notation, but it really helps
many things. We don't *need* the various notations of mathematics
(check out Newton's use of English for complex mathematical
relationships in the Principia), but it really helps things.
On 7/26/2011 8:34 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 3:28 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
why do we need an HLL distribution language, rather than, say, a
low-level distribution language, such as bytecode or a VM-level
ASM-like format
On 7/27/2011 2:12 AM, David Barbour wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 11:14 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
one can support ifdef blocks in the IL, no real problem there.
Those seem like a problem all by themselves. Definitions are
inflexible, lacking in domain
On 7/27/2011 6:37 AM, David Goehrig wrote:
On Jul 26, 2011, at 8:45 PM, Casey Ransberger
casey.obrie...@gmail.com mailto:casey.obrie...@gmail.com wrote:
Worth pointing out that server side JS dodges this problem. Now
that Node is out there, people are actually starting to do stuff with
On 7/27/2011 9:35 AM, David Barbour wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 3:41 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
a non-turing-complete IL is too limited to do much of anything
useful with WRT developing actual software...
You aren't alone in holding this uninformed
On 7/27/2011 1:52 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:40 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
I think fitness and merit are some often misunderstood ideas.
People understand just fine that a solution of technical merit can
fail due to market forces
On 7/25/2011 4:28 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 3:20 PM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
too bad there is no standardized bytecode or anything though, but
then I guess it would at this point be more like
browser-integrated Flash or something
On 7/26/2011 5:34 AM, Igor Stasenko wrote:
On 26 July 2011 05:21, Alan Kayalan.n...@yahoo.com wrote:
Again good points.
Java itself could have been fixed if it were not for the Sun marketing
people who rushed the electronic toaster language out where it was not fit
to go. Sun was filled with
On 7/26/2011 6:43 AM, John Nilsson wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 8:16 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
the main merit of a bytecode format is that it could shorten the
path in getting to native code, potentially allowing it to be faster.
It seems to me
On 7/26/2011 9:05 AM, David Barbour wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 1:50 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
whether or not compiling to bytecode is itself an actually
effective security measure, it is the commonly expected security
measure.
Is it? I've
On 7/25/2011 12:59 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Igor Stasenko siguc...@gmail.com
mailto:siguc...@gmail.com wrote:
how different our systems would be, if guys who started it 20
years back would think a bit about future?
The guys who spend their time
On 7/22/2011 6:41 PM, Casey Ransberger wrote:
I did this dance too... Hmm... Seems the Mac installer comes with some
kind of translation tool that's advertised to be able to output MPEG,
maybe we can use that to save others the trouble of installing the
Real client.
yeah...
even on
On 7/23/2011 2:10 PM, Casey Ransberger wrote:
Drat. Tried to convert this, but I just get a dialog that says
convert only works from a local file. I don't see an option to pull
the actual video file down, and IIRC .ram files are like trackers that
point at a stream rather than being the actual
On 7/19/2011 8:24 AM, Ondřej Bílka wrote:
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 05:16:24AM -0700, Casey Ransberger wrote:
Even if it were possible to have a last language, it would be double plus
ungood.
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Paul Homer[1]paul_ho...@yahoo.ca
wrote:
Realistically,
On 7/17/2011 2:33 PM, Craig Latta wrote:
That talk would have been a whole lot better if he had grounded it
with a discussion of how constraints are good for creativity. It's how
he should have spent the time where he went on about memorizing Pi for
no good reason...
if memorizing pie is
On 7/17/2011 2:46 PM, David Leibs wrote:
I couldn't handle his condescending attitude towards goto statements.
I might not use them very often but when you need one there is nothing better.
generally agreed...
it is not for no reason that languages like C# still have them, despite
being
On 7/17/2011 3:39 PM, Derek Kulinski wrote:
Hello BGB,
Sunday, July 17, 2011, 2:51:40 PM, you wrote:
for example, if/while/for/... don't mean goto shouldn't exist in a
language or should be branded as evil as a result, rather they provide
better alternatives such that things like goto
On 7/17/2011 5:18 PM, Karl Robillard wrote:
Heh... that talk didn't recieve a very warm welcome over at Lambda the
Ultimate either. My favorite comment was the idea that AI could advance to
the point where the final programming language may end up being English. I
guess that means programmers
well, here is my thing:
I mostly develop on x86 (and x86-64), and so most of my code is targeted
to this target.
recently, I figured I would try to port some of my stuff to ARM, mostly
as a matter of personal experience and seeing if I could. I started with
my assembler here (it is a major
On 7/9/2011 5:07 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote:
BGB,
or, maybe all my x86 experience blinds me some to the elegance of
ARM's ISA?...
whatever is so great about it, well, I am not seeing it at this level.
why then do so many people seem to complain that the x86 ISA is so
horrible?...
I think
On 6/24/2011 9:07 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 24/06/2011, at 11:42 PM, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
They gave that presentation more than once (I saw it a OOPSLA).
Awesome :)
Here's a version from JAOO'08, streams fine in Germany:
On 6/25/2011 3:27 AM, Bob Arning wrote:
I concur. It was mildly entertaining at points, but mostly I kept
hoping they would speed up the pace while slowing down the camera
switching. Since some smart people recommended it, I kept plugging
away. I got a bit over half way before bailing.
I
On 6/22/2011 2:45 PM, Steve Dekorte wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nii1n8PYLrc
Thoughts?
interesting, but wasn't so fond of the music or graphics or skits...
a bit much like something from the 70s...
also, although mainstream languages aren't necessarily all that
On 6/22/2011 5:08 PM, Steve Wart wrote:
Still, databases and file systems are both based on concepts that
predate electronic computers.
When Windows and Macs came along the document metaphor became
prevalent, but in practice this was always just a user friendly name
for a file. The layers and
On 6/20/2011 9:19 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
Hi... (see below)...
On 21/06/2011, at 3:42 AM, BGB wrote:
On 6/20/2011 3:22 AM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 20/06/2011, at 8:06 PM, BGB wrote:
hmm... S-Expression database?...
sort of like a hybrid between a database and a persistent store
On 6/19/2011 9:49 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 20/06/2011, at 2:33 PM, BGB wrote:
in a sense, the metaphor no longer works, and should likely itself be left to
fall into the recycle-bin of history. worse yet is having to read stuff written
by people who actually take this metaphor seriously
On 6/19/2011 11:54 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 20/06/2011, at 4:33 PM, BGB wrote:
interestingly, I don't believe in getting rid of the file-system, per-se, as
technically it works fairly well and is a proven piece of technology.
Interestingly, I disagree entirely. Finding things is a pain
On 6/19/2011 11:58 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 20/06/2011, at 4:33 PM, BGB wrote:
For example, when web programming on a specific web app, I use a web browser, a text editor, a database
management program, a command line, and a couple other tools. It'd be nice to be able to fit these
tools
On 6/20/2011 2:19 AM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 20/06/2011, at 6:33 PM, BGB wrote:
I am not certain I follow how this would get rid of file-systems though...
I am not aware of any good alternative to the filesystem which is generally
better than the filesystem (can effectively manage huge
On 6/20/2011 3:22 AM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 20/06/2011, at 8:06 PM, BGB wrote:
hmm... S-Expression database?...
sort of like a hybrid between a database and a persistent store.
or such...
I'd like to know if you think there's a difference between a filesystem and a
database
On 6/19/2011 7:20 PM, Steve Dekorte wrote:
On 2011-06-14 Tue, at 09:36 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
The thing that irritates me about this attitude of don't consider kids as equal is that
we DO consider them as equal in other frames... we expect so much of them in terms of linguistic
and
On 6/16/2011 8:43 AM, Frederick Grose wrote:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 4:34 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/15/2011 8:04 PM, BGB wrote:
On 6/15/2011 3:22 PM, Ian Piumarta wrote:
On Jun 15, 2011, at 14:09 , BGB wrote
On 6/18/2011 1:05 PM, Casey Ransberger wrote:
I'm asking myself how relevant the projects I hack on are in this
context. Others probably are too. Of the stuff that didn't disappear
into the commercial void, recently it's been mostly Smalltalk for me,
and FONC is not about Smalltalk; Smalltalk
On 6/17/2011 11:37 AM, Casey Ransberger wrote:
On Jun 15, 2011, at 8:55 AM, Ian Piumartapiuma...@speakeasy.net wrote:
Invention receives no attention, and innovation (even when incorrectly
understood) receives lip service in the press, but no current-day vehicle
exists to to nurture it.
On 6/16/2011 8:43 AM, Frederick Grose wrote:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 4:34 AM, BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/15/2011 8:04 PM, BGB wrote:
On 6/15/2011 3:22 PM, Ian Piumarta wrote:
On Jun 15, 2011, at 14:09 , BGB wrote
On 6/14/2011 9:50 PM, Dethe Elza wrote:
On 2011-06-14, at 9:36 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
The thing that irritates me about this attitude of don't consider kids as equal is that
we DO consider them as equal in other frames... we expect so much of them in terms of linguistic
and cognitive
On 6/15/2011 9:06 AM, Dethe Elza wrote:
On 2011-06-15, at 8:55 AM, Ian Piumarta wrote:
If a wiki is the kind of database you had in mind, please feel free to make
use of:
http://vpri.org/fonc_wiki
Thanks for setting this up, Ian. When I go to Log in/ create account I don't
see any way to
On 6/13/2011 8:09 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 14/06/2011, at 7:33 AM, Casey Ransberger wrote:
Kids may not have the linguistic development out of the way that one needs to do
serious programming. Adults who don't already code may find themselves short
on some of the core concepts that
-by-reference, ...).
or such...
Sent from my phone
Den 15 jun 2011 01:08 skrev BGB cr88...@gmail.com
mailto:cr88...@gmail.com:
On 6/14/2011 2:31 PM, John Nilsson wrote:
On both questions the answer is basically that Java was an example. I
was looking for a general solution. Something
On 6/13/2011 1:33 AM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 12/06/2011, at 1:00 PM, BGB wrote:
image-based systems have their own sets of drawbacks though...
dynamic reload could be a good enough compromise IMO, if done well...
I don't follow this train of thought. Everything runs in an image. That's
On 6/13/2011 3:19 AM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 13/06/2011, at 7:50 PM, BGB wrote:
On 6/13/2011 1:33 AM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 12/06/2011, at 1:00 PM, BGB wrote:
image-based systems have their own sets of drawbacks though...
dynamic reload could be a good enough compromise IMO
On 6/13/2011 8:39 PM, Yoshiki Ohshima wrote:
At Mon, 13 Jun 2011 17:16:10 -0400,
C. Scott Ananian wrote:
given that most non-Chinese can't read Chinese writing, despite that many of
these characters do actually resemble crude line-art drawings of various
things and ideas.
It is a common
On 6/11/2011 6:30 PM, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 1:40 AM, BGBcr88...@gmail.com wrote:
The responsiveness of exploratory programming environments (such as the
Smalltalk programming environment) allows the programmer to concentrate on
the task at hand rather than being
On 6/10/2011 7:33 AM, Chris Warburton wrote:
On Thu, 2011-06-09 at 11:42 -0700, BGB wrote:
interesting...
less painfully slow than I would have expected from the description...
I wasn't thinking exactly like run an emulator, run OS in emulator,
but more like, a browser plugin which looked
On 6/10/2011 10:24 AM, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
On Jun 9, 2011, at 5:58 AM, Julian Levistonjul...@leviston.net wrote:
On 09/06/2011, at 7:04 PM, BGB wrote:
actually, possibly a relevant question here, would be why Java applets largely fell on
their face, but Flash largely took off (in all its
(sorry, I don't know if this belongs on-list or not...).
On 6/10/2011 1:44 PM, Max OrHai wrote:
Well, INTP here, so at least we have /some/ common ground.
yeah... I think I generally get along well enough with most people, in
general...
well, except Q's, which are basically people who
On 6/8/2011 11:36 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
Answering my own question...
On 09/06/2011, at 4:27 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
See below...
On 09/06/2011, at 2:59 PM, Josh Gargus wrote:
I really don't understand what this means:
typedef struct object *(*method_t)(struct object *receiver,
On 6/9/2011 12:56 AM, Josh Gargus wrote:
On May 31, 2011, at 7:30 AM, Alan Kay wrote:
Hi Cornelius
There are lots of egregiously wrong things in the web design. Perhaps
one of the simplest is that the browser folks have lacked the
perspective to see that the browser is not like an
On 6/9/2011 12:20 PM, Josh Gargus wrote:
On Jun 9, 2011, at 12:06 PM, BGB wrote:
On 6/9/2011 11:10 AM, Josh Gargus wrote:
That all sounds very cool.
However, I don't think that it's feasible to try to ship something like this as
standard in all browsers, if only for political reasons
On 6/8/2011 9:20 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
Tanks everyone for answering on this so much...
Comment/Question below,
On 09/06/2011, at 4:56 AM, Kevin Jones wrote:
I really don't understand what this means:
typedef struct object *(*method_t)(struct object *receiver, ...);
method_t is a
On 6/8/2011 10:03 PM, Josh Gargus wrote:
Looks like you beat me to the punch on my last email...
On Jun 8, 2011, at 9:39 PM, BGB wrote:
apparently, some people don't like using typedef for some reason I am
not entirely sure of...
According to wikipedia
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki
On 6/6/2011 12:18 AM, Casey Ransberger wrote:
Below:)
On Jun 5, 2011, at 11:19 PM, C. Scott Ananiancsc...@laptop.org wrote:
I explored this idea a bit once upon a time in the context of Java:
http://cscott.net/Publications/design.pdf
The bibliography cites most of the related work I know
of little things (implementing stuff, thinking oh well,
this would be nifty...) happens to allow a few C-like constructions to
be written.
also:
buf=new char[256];
str=Hello;
t=buf; s=str;
while(*t++=*s++);
funny how this works sometimes...
or such...
On Jun 5, 2011, at 11:55 PM, BGB cr88
On 6/6/2011 6:05 PM, David Barbour wrote:
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 10:44 AM, Julian Leviston jul...@leviston.net
mailto:jul...@leviston.net wrote:
Is a language I program in necessarily limiting in its expressibility?
Yes. All communication architectures are necessarily limiting in
On 6/5/2011 4:48 PM, Steve Wart wrote:
I like both Smalltalk and APL. I disagree with the assumption that
operator precedence is a big hurdle for people learning Smalltalk. At
least I find mathematical expressions in Smalltalk to be clearer than
their counterparts in Lisp. I like the following
On 6/5/2011 7:06 PM, David Leibs wrote:
I love APL! Learning APL is really all about learning the idioms and
how to apply them. This takes quite a lot of training time. Doing
this kind of training will change the way you think.
Alan Perlis quote: A language that doesn't affect the way
On 6/3/2011 8:37 PM, Scott McLoughlin wrote:
For many, many moons, I've examined the early Smalltalk
books, small bootstrap Forth systems, Lisp based systems
(implementing a large subset of CL decades ago) and the like.
In recent years, I've taken an interest in type systems and
typed
101 - 200 of 229 matches
Mail list logo
